Completion Percentage, you worried?

[Birdlives]

Completion percentage. If you look at the barometer of what seperates a palyoff quaterback from an average to below quarterback, it appears anything below 58% is not good.

Mayhap you could've used the spell check function before you posted . . .

. . . as well as a dictionary.

Seriously, your shtick is tiresome. If you're going to troll, at least troll in a somewhat coherent manner.

I just want to know what a palyoff quarterback is.

[mistertim]

Vince Young isn't as good a passer as Campbell. But I think what he does on the ground and the way he seemed to make big plays to win games makes him a better quarterback than Campbell. You can't look at Young the same way you look at Campbell because Young is a running quarterback.

:doh: :doh: :doh: :doh: :doh:

That is my entire point! You're bringing up a running QB and comparing him to a passing QB in a thread about completion percentage!

:handicap:

[Jumbo]

Direct, simple, and yet eloquent. Well (and perhaps prophetically) said Anne, as usual.

[IWANTOBEGM]

Kid can throw the deep ball but be prepared for some frustrating times this season when you say "you have to complete that throw Jason!". The over throw of ARE on the first series last week is something that he will repeat.

Keep in mind it's his first full season as a starter and the first offseason working with the receivers full time...he'll get it or we'll be drafting another QB in two years.

[Birdlives]

To answer the original post seriously, completion % can increase with time in the same offense, studying the playbook and gaining both comfort and familiarity with the players around you. Gaging Campbell's career based on such a limited amount of playing time seems at best naive. Many QB's have come into the league and looked absolutely "lights out" in their first few games while many others have developed skill and accuracy with more practice and time in the game.

Campbell certainly had good protection and a solid running game. The question becomes how much of that was because of Campbell's presence in the pocket? Certainly some of this can be a result of play calling. Certainly some of it has to do with the personnel. The running game picked up a lot of steam when Campbell started as opposed to Brunell. I haven't pulled the stats, but I think there's something in that.

Campbell also had the bad luck to play on a team that had an absolutely terrible defense that forced very few turnovers and created very few sacks. How much better would the offense have been had Campbell had more short fields to work with? Certainly other teams had more of this as the Redskins were dead last in turnovers caused, no?

I'm not going to say one way or the other what Campbells completion % means for his future. I'm certainly not going to pretend he is the be all end all of QB's But I do certainly think those that wish to judge him based on 7 games aren't being very patient. Considering how little time Campbell has had to understand what by all accounts is a very complex offense, it seems to me he might deserve a full 16 before anybody can bring in a verdict.

[KCJDLJ]

Another ___________, are you worried thread. Yawn.

[bulldog]

John Elway's completion percentage was not great early in his career and even after he had taken Denver into the postseason.

Why? The offense called for intermediate and deep passes.

I smile every time I read one of these articles written by someone that is watching a quarterback in a West Coast offense throwing 5-8 yard passes as a staple and then marvelling at the completion percentage

Campbell has a strong arm and is going to make plays down the field.

He needs to increase his accuracy in the short-passing game, but you are never going to see a player with his big play capability in the 65% completion range, because his success is not going to be based on those 5-8 yard dump and then run after the catch plays folks are used to seeing now in the NFL with quarterbacks of the physique of a Jeff Garcia or a Tony Romo sits to pee.

[Henry]

I'm not saying it can't be improved at all,

Yeah, you are saying that. Right here:

but he isn't all of a sudden going to go from possibly the least accurate starter in the NFL to an adaquately accurate starter just because he spent his whole offseason studying the playbook at Redskins Park

What I'm saying is he isn't necessarily going to continue to struggle in this area for his entire career, simply because he did so during his first seven games having basically no work with the first team, and considering he didn't struggle in any other area of play.

If you aren't saying it can't be improved at all, why are you insisting on continuing to argue with people who are just saying he MIGHT improve?

I really don't see why this is such a sticky point for you, so much so that you are saying TDs are no big thing. By the way, I have never said completion percentage is no big thing, I've simply said it's not EVERYTHING. You and the Cowboy fan disagree. Consider that opinion noted.

[Stone Cold]

when you throw vertically, the % will inevitably go down. however, i'll take 17 for 30 and 275 yds to mark brunell's horizontal 22 for 27 and 125 yds anyday...and twice on sun

[Hibachi]

Yeah, you are saying that. Right here:

What I'm saying is he isn't necessarily going to continue to struggle in this area for his entire career, simply because he did so during his first seven games having basically no work with the first team, and considering he didn't struggle in any other area of play.

If you aren't saying it can't be improved at all, why are you insisting on continuing to argue with people who are just saying he MIGHT improve?

Every one of your points seemed to be in favor of Campbell succeeding. I guess that somehow I got the idea that you thought Campbell would succeed. I'm not saying Campbell can't succeed, but I will say that the percentages are not with him.

Since 1983, here are all the quarterbacks who were drafted in the first round, but did not start their rookie season. The stats are from their first season with 100 pass attempts. The reason I didn't include rookie quarterbacks who started in their first year was because there are so many cases (McNabb, Elway, Bledsoe, Testaverde, Aikman, etc.) where they put up horrible numbers in the first season only to put up great numbers in their second seasons. I found far fewer instances in which quarterbacks who did not start their rookie seasons became significantly better than what their first season statistics shows.

In order of completion percentage:

1. Chad Pennington - 69 (7.8/22-6) [89.3]

2. Daunte Culpepper - 63 (8.3/33-16) [90.8]

3. Steve McNair - 62 (8.4/6-4) [83.2]

4. Jim Harbaugh - 62 (6.8/5-9) [77.6]

5. Carson Palmer - 61 (6.7/18-18) [91.5]

6. Tony Eason - 60 (7.5/23-8) [79.7]

7. Chuck Long - 56 (6.2/11-20) [64.5]

8. Michael Vick - 55 (6.9/16-8) [75.7]

9. David Klingler - 55 (5.6/6-9) [65.1]

10. Trent Dilfer - 54 (6.7/4-18) [71.3]

11. Jason Campbell - 53 (6.3/10-6) [76.5]

12. Chris Miller - 52 (6.1/11-12) [74.9]

13. J.P. Losman -50 (5.9/8-8) [77.4]

14. Todd Blackledge - 50 (5.8/6-11) [60.2]

15. Art Schlichter - 44 (5.0/3-7) [42.6]

In order of yards per attempt:

1. Steve McNair - 8.4 [83.2]

2. Daunte Culpepper - 8.3 [90.8]

3. Chad Pennington - 7.8 [89.3]

4. Tony Eason - 7.5 [79.3]

5. Michael Vick - 6.9 [75.7]

6. Jim Harbaugh - 6.8 [77.6]

7. Carson Palmer - 6.7 [91.5]

8. Trent Dilfer - 6.7 [71.3]

9. Jason Campbell - 6.3 [76.5]

10. Chuck Long - 6.2 [64.5]

11. Chris Miller - 6.1 [74.9]

12. J.P. Losman - 5.9 [77.4]

13. Todd Blackledge - 5.8 [60.2]

14. David Klingler - 5.6 [65.1]

15. Art Schlichter - 5.0 [42.6]

In order of TD to INT ratio:

1. Chad Pennington - 3.6 [89.3]

2. Tony Eason - 2.9 [79.3]

3. Daunte Culpepper - 2.1 [90.8]

4. Michael Vick - 2 [75.7]

5. Jason Campbell - 1.7 [76.5]

6. Steve McNair - 1.5 [83.2]

7. Carson Palmer - 1 [91.5]

8. J.P. Losman - 1 [77.4]

9. Chris Miller - .9 [74.9]

10. David Klingler - .7 [65.1]

11. Jim Harbaugh - .5 [77.6]

12. Chuck Long - .5 [64.5]

13. Todd Blackledge - .5 [60.2]

14. Art Schlichter - .4 [42.6]

15. Trent Dilfer - .2 [71.3]

In completion percentage and yards per attempt, Campbell is in the mix with journeyman quarterbacks. In the TD to INT ratio category, Campbell is in the mix with some very good quarterbacks, and some not so good quarterbacks.

I don't mean to base everything on statistics. There are certainly other things to consider (the players around him, work ethic, etc.) However, I'm just trying to point out that compared to other quarterbacks with similar backgrounds, Campbell ranks near the bottom.

I really don't see why this is such a sticky point for you, so much so that you are saying TDs are no big thing. By the way, I have never said completion percentage is no big thing, I've simply said it's not EVERYTHING. You and the Cowboy fan disagree. Consider that opinion noted.

Touchdown passes in football are kind of like RBIs in baseball. Runs are certainly important, but they are not important in evaluating a hitter's future performance. Batting average, homeruns, etc. are more important because they don't involve as much luck (having men on base in position to score). Touchdown passes are similar. You can have great numbers in completion percentage, yards per attempt, etc., and still not have great TD numbers, yet your team is scoring just as many points because you're scoring touchdowns on the ground.

[Santana_Fan]

And Campbell's 53% clip is below all but one of them. What's your point?

Hummm...the point is, that even the elite QB's, werent "the best" when they first began. What's the difficulty in getting the point? Romo sits to pee could have done all this his first year, but it isnt guaranteed that he'll continue on that route.

[Santana_Fan]

First Year Starters Last Year:

Tony Romo sits to pee - 65%

Philip Rivers - 62%

Jay Cutler - 59%

Tarvaris Jackson - 58%

Seneca Wallace - 58%

Matt Leinart - 57%

Derek Anderson - 56%

Bruce Gradkowski - 54%

Andrew Walter - 53%

Jason Campbell - 53%

Vince Young - 51%

Yet and still, none of these QB's, are running a more complexed Offense than Campbell is. If you ask me, Leinart should have been a little higher than that, with the weapons he had.

[Henry]

Every one of your points seemed to be in favor of Campbell succeeding. I guess that somehow I got the idea that you thought Campbell would succeed.

In my first post in this thread I say the jury is still out, but since every one of my points is in response to you and Cowboy fan it just seems like I'm saying he will succeed. I've repeated several times that's not what I'm saying.

I'm not saying Campbell can't succeed, but I will say that the percentages are not with him.

The percentages are not with any QB. Most crash and burn or become serviceable journeymen for a few years. Very few become top QBs. Which is why teams that find top QBs are perennial winners in this league.

If your sole point here is that we shouldn't EXPECT Campbell to become a top-flight QB starting this season, well, my answer is 'duh'

I don't know how many more times I need to concede that in this thread.

If your point is Campbell is more likely to fail than other current young QBs, well, I disagree. He struggles in some areas, does other things well ... just like most young guys.

Since 1983, here are all the quarterbacks who were drafted in the first round, but did not start their rookie season. The stats are from their first season with 100 pass attempts. The reason I didn't include rookie quarterbacks who started in their first year was because there are so many cases (McNabb, Elway, Bledsoe, Testaverde, Aikman, etc.) where they put up horrible numbers in the first season only to put up great numbers in their second seasons. I found far fewer instances in which quarterbacks who did not start their rookie seasons became significantly better than what their first season statistics shows.

That's the entire list? Really? 15 guys? Honestly, I thought there were a lot more. If that's everyone from the past 24 years, things look not so bad for Campbell. There are only four bonafide busts in the group (Long, Blackledge, Klingler and Schlichter). Campbell finished ahead of 2 of them in his weakest area, ahead of all of them in his next weakest, and finished WAY ahead of them all in his strongest area.

Also, the one area where all the wash-out QBs were consitantly weak and all the non-busts were consistantly strong was the TD/INT rate, which pretty much completely contradicts your contention that TD/INT rate isn't a good indicator of a young QB's potential.

So looking at that list, statistically it seems that Campbell has a good chance of being at least serviceable for a few years.

[JRAB]

To answer the question, yes, I'm concerned. He didn't look good. Going back to last year, he would have the occasional nice pass, but it is just one or two out of many throws that are way off target. What he did in college has zero to do with what he'll do in the NFL.

They say he studied a lot and has looked better in minicamps, so I do have some hope. However, every coach in the world will tell you that things are different when the pads come on and defenders are free to hit the QB. They say that for a reason too.

For him to come out and look terrible in his first preseason game (in his second year after getting all offseason snaps) is a concern. Oh yeah, he did hit his normal couple of good throws... but they were surrounded by his normal bunch of off target passes and staring down WR's.

Yes, I'm worried. I'm hopeful though that he'll at least be good enough to manage the game and not lose it for us.

[Hibachi]

In my first post in this thread I say the jury is still out, but since every one of my points is in response to you and Cowboy fan it just seems like I'm saying he will succeed. I've repeated several times that's not what I'm saying.

The percentages are not with any QB. Most crash and burn or become serviceable journeymen for a few years. Very few become top QBs. Which is why teams that find top QBs are perennial winners in this league.

If your sole point here is that we shouldn't EXPECT Campbell to become a top-flight QB starting this season, well, my answer is 'duh'

I don't know how many more times I need to concede that in this thread.

If your point is Campbell is more likely to fail than other current young QBs, well, I disagree. He struggles in some areas, does other things well ... just like most young guys.

I guess we agree then.

That's the entire list? Really? 15 guys? Honestly, I thought there were a lot more. If that's everyone from the past 24 years, things look not so bad for Campbell. There are only four bonafide busts in the group (Long, Blackledge, Klingler and Schlichter). Campbell finished ahead of 2 of them in his weakest area, ahead of all of them in his next weakest, and finished WAY ahead of them all in his strongest area.

Also, the one area where all the wash-out QBs were consitantly weak and all the non-busts were consistantly strong was the TD/INT rate, which pretty much completely contradicts your contention that TD/INT rate isn't a good indicator of a young QB's potential.

So looking at that list, statistically it seems that Campbell has a good chance of being at least serviceable for a few years.

Philip Rivers and Rex Grossman were not included because this past season was their first season as starters (therefore their numbers can't show anything about future performance). Others not included were Jim Drunkenmiller, Dan McGwire, Todd Marinovich, and Andre Ware because none of them ever started a season (100 pass attemtps is what I used). There are the busts that were missing. I disagree that the TD/INT rate was any more indicative of future performance than any other area. It seemed they were all pretty much equal in that regard. Keep in mind that no quarterback on the list ever became a truly successful quarterback (except for maybe Losman, who the jury is still out on) with as low a completion percentage and yards per attempt in their first season. Look at the list, he is surrounded by busts for the most part. There are, however, players with similar (even better) TD/INT ratios to Campbell that never panned out (Eason, Vick).

[Henry]

Keep in mind that no quarterback on the list ever became a truly successful quarterback (except for maybe Losman, who the jury is still out on) with as low a completion percentage and yards per attempt in their first season. Look at the list, he is surrounded by busts for the most part.

Chris Miller played in the league for 10 years, was a starter for six years who went to a pro-bowl. Trent Dilfer played for 12 years, started for six, went to a pro-bowl and won a superbowl. JP Losman last year completed 62.5% of his passes and averaged 7.1 yards a throw.

If you are saying Campbell isn't likely to be a Hall of Famer, that's one thing. But players that last in this league for a decade aren't busts.

There are, however, players with similar (even better) TD/INT ratios to Campbell that never panned out (Eason, Vick).

Eason had high numbers across the board, so if he invalidates my arguement he also invalidates yours. I'm not sure a guy who QBs a team to a superbowl and back-to-back playoff appearances 'never panned out.' He just didn't pan out for very long.

Also, if you are going to claim Vick didn't pan out don't talk about Vince Young anymore.

[theTruthTeller]

One thing that the statistics don't show, and particularly the comparison with other young quarterbacks, is the state of the team during the games played. When Campbell was inserted last year, the season was over (my apologies to those who thought there was still a legitimate shot going into week 14). I don't think Gibbs wanted to play Campbell at all last year, but he certainly didn't want Campbell picking up bad habits to win meaningless games. Assuming that Campbell was under strict orders to (1) dump it off unless there was a clearly open receiver down field and (2) throw it away if no one was clearly open, that would explain both the low percentage and the high TD/int ratio.

This year will be much more indicative Campbell's ability, because every game will be meaningful. His stats could go in either direction. He will need to squeeze in passes to get first downs and touchdowns that he might have thrown away last year. This should increase both his percentage and his number of interceptions. He'll also be less likely to dump off, which will increase his average gain per pass attempt, along with his number of sacks. Which way it falls won't be known until the end of the year.

[Henry]

Well, just watching the games it did look like Campbell was off target a lot last year too. Again, that may be due to his unfamiliarity with the first team and the patterns and whatnot, or it could mean he's just not that accurate.

We'll find out soon enough I suppose.

[Peregrine]

People can easily forget that oftentimes completion percentages can be skewed by end of half/game attempts. At the end of the first half, Campbell heaved a few throws that dropped his completion percentage, and when you only have 14 attempts, thats easy to do. Also, comp % is partly determined by how many drops your recievers have. Better teams have less drops, and thus reflect on the QB comp %.

[dizzinator53]

PCT First season (11-16 games)

58.4 marino

56.7 manning

56.5 joe montana

47.5 john elway

55.6 Johnny Unitas

they each played at least 11 games their first season.

JC is at 53 after SEVEN games.... everyone get over the completion percentage.

Good Post! :applause:

[Birdlives]

In order of completion percentage:

1. Chad Pennington - 69 (7.8/22-6) [89.3]

2. Daunte Culpepper - 63 (8.3/33-16) [90.8]

3. Steve McNair - 62 (8.4/6-4) [83.2]

4. Jim Harbaugh - 62 (6.8/5-9) [77.6]

5. Carson Palmer - 61 (6.7/18-18) [91.5]

6. Tony Eason - 60 (7.5/23-8) [79.7]

7. Chuck Long - 56 (6.2/11-20) [64.5]

8. Michael Vick - 55 (6.9/16-8) [75.7]

9. David Klingler - 55 (5.6/6-9) [65.1]

10. Trent Dilfer - 54 (6.7/4-18) [71.3]

11. Jason Campbell - 53 (6.3/10-6) [76.5]

12. Chris Miller - 52 (6.1/11-12) [74.9]

13. J.P. Losman -50 (5.9/8-8) [77.4]

14. Todd Blackledge - 50 (5.8/6-11) [60.2]

15. Art Schlichter - 44 (5.0/3-7) [42.6]

In completion percentage and yards per attempt, Campbell is in the mix with journeyman quarterbacks. In the TD to INT ratio category, Campbell is in the mix with some very good quarterbacks, and some not so good quarterbacks.

I don't mean to base everything on statistics. There are certainly other things to consider (the players around him, work ethic, etc.) However, I'm just trying to point out that compared to other quarterbacks with similar backgrounds, Campbell ranks near the bottom.

The stats you pulled are interesting and all, but by making certain qualifications you've skewed them to suit your argument.

Firstly, you're comparing Campbell in 7 games to several starters who had a full or close to a full season of starts.

For example, guys like Palmer(more than 200 more pass attempts and BTW, was 54.9% in his first 7 games),

Culpepper(more than 200 more pass attempts),

Dilfer(more than 200 more pass attempts), all played more than 14 games. Dilfer played in 5 games the year before your post and threw 82 balls(46.3%).

In other QB's you've eliminated their real first live action by qualifying a minimum number of pass attempts for the season.

For example McNair, who threw 80 times his first season in 6 games for a 51% completion percentage, got a full off-season and then improved his completion % by 10 full points the following year in 10 games (in the first 3 he didn't throw more than 10 balls) with 6 starts for his completion % shown above.

Clearly this example means you're not qualifying things based solely on starts alone as McNair wasn't the full-time starter until the last 6 games of the year. He was then a full 16 game starter the following year when he posted a 52% completion rate.

You're comparing him to Eason, who in his first season threw 95 times for a 48% completion % playing 16 games and starting 4,

Harbaugh who threw 97 times in 10 games for a 48.5% completion % just barely missing your minimum requirement.

Those two guys then had the season completion % you state above the following year.

I still dont understand Vicks numbers as he played the year before your stat line, had 113 pass attempts, thus qualifying for your chart but only had a 44.2% completion % in 8 games. I guess this one is based on the fact that he didn't start those games. But you don't offer the same requirement to others on your list.

Really though, isn't first time action still first time action? In 5 of those games he threw more than 10 balls, 3 he threw more than 20 times.

Basically by your standards, stats don't count if they didn't have more than 100 pass attempts. But really, many of these guys didn't do as well as your numbers say because you're not using their first seven games, or their first seven starts. Several of them saw live action the year before they became starters. Several more did not necessarily start every game for which you give them credit. But really, this would be considered the first live action by those players. So all in all, by qualifying certain things you make the stats say what you want.

What's encouraging is that several of these players you've listed above had fairly poor showings in terms of completion % in their first 5 to 10 games of live NFL action and many of them, after an off season and an opportunity to absorb what they learned actually managed to improve their completion % often by 10 or more % points. So what makes Campbell that different? It certainly stands to reason he could indeed improve his completion % this year if given the chance.

Considering he started for a team with a terrible defense, that gave him no short fields to work with, and had dropped out of the playoff race, and now has finally had his first full off season going in as the starter, it stands to reason he has as much chance as any of the QB's you've listed to improve his game, improve his completion % by 10% points and be a good QB. Does it guarantee this? No one has said it did, but it's also not as unlikely as you're making it out to be either.

[InsaneBoost]

Worried, no sir.

[Birdlives]

I forgot to mention that Carson Palmer's YPA in his first seven games was 5.8.

[Dumbsheet]

Obviously I know it's only been 7 or 8 games in Cambpell's career so far, so it's not like anything conclusive can be made, yo. But I figure it/s worth noting what the stats say are his strong points and weak points thus far. Thus far, his strong points show that he doesn't turn it over much (this past Saturday notwithstanding) and his weak points show that accuracy aint' exactly his thang. Got a pretty lively discussion/debate started on the merits of all this, what this all means, and how it shapes folks' expectations for the kiddo's future...so i'd like to pat myself on the back for that.

~ pat, pat ~

I'm so cool.

[Birdlives]

Obviously I know it's only been 7 or 8 games in Cambpell's career so far, so it's not like anything conclusive can be made, yo. But I figure it/s worth noting what the stats say are his strong points and weak points thus far. Thus far, his strong points show that he doesn't turn it over much (this past Saturday notwithstanding) and his weak points show that accuracy aint' exactly his thang. Got a pretty lively discussion/debate started on the merits of all this, what this all means, and how it shapes folks' expectations for the kiddo's future...so i'd like to pat myself on the back for that.

~ pat, pat ~

I'm so cool.

Lively indeed. It also helps to know that more than one QB went from poor completion % in their first few games to having acceptable %'s as they developed. More than one increased by 10%.

As for "cool" those who are, don't need to advertise. :cool: